Cuba

Dictator of choice

Looking back now, we can see that Pinochet was good for Chile, whereas another dictator, Castro, is bad for his country.

  • more
    • All Share Services

The arrest of Chile’s counter-revolutionary general, Augusto Pinochet, and the approach of the 40th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution bring into focus two celebrated battles of the Cold War, in which members of my generation took passionate sides. As one who went into these battles on one side and came out on another, I have mixed but ultimately clear emotions about this history and the events that shaped it.

Being in the left imbues one with a sense of having chosen the moral side in all such conflicts. Belonging to the camp of morality and progress becomes a kind of second nature, and compensates somewhat for the fact that most of these battles are necessarily lost. It used to be said among us that as revolutionaries we were destined to lose every battle but the last one. We did not join the progressive cause to support history’s winners, but to stand up for its losers: The powerless, the victimized, the oppressed. Our political commitment was about weighing in on the side of social justice. It is a good feeling.

For this reason, when it came time to relinquish those political commitments, it was far easier to identify what was wrong with the left and to draw back from it than it was to move in the direction of the right and plant my feet on new political terrain. As a matter of fact, I withdrew from all politics for nearly 10 years before changing course.

As I was stepping back from the left, repelled by crimes that progressives had committed and catastrophes they had produced (it turned out that winning the “last” battle could be worse than losing), I had a nagging feeling about certain political events and historical figures associated with this past. One of the figures was Pinochet.

In our progressive version of this historical episode, we saw Chilean democracy as having produced a historical anomaly — a Marxist actually elected to power. This Marxist, Salvador Allende, had even been allowed by the ruling forces to form a government and to begin a program of social reform. We knew, of course, that this could not last. Ruling classes never gave up their power without a fight. Sooner or later, there would be a counter-revolution, probably a military coup. The only question was when. In making this calculation, we had our eye on Washington, the capital, in our eyes, of the world imperialist system. In political statements we issued, we invoked the cautionary memory of the Bay of Pigs, the failed CIA attempt to topple Fidel Castro in the second year of his revolutionary regime. This was the true face of American power, whose policies were orchestrated by multinational corporations with investment stakes in the third world. It was only a matter of time before their interests asserted themselves.

According to the script, the coup against Allende came in 1973. The regime was toppled and Allende committed suicide in the heat of the battle. The generals’ coup was led by Pinochet, who became the nation’s military dictator. Thousands of progressives were rounded up; 5,000 were executed. The military dictatorship was made permanent. Chile’s democracy was dead.

We knew that, of course, the CIA was behind these events. Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger could not tolerate another revolutionary example in the hemisphere. The International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (ITT) had big investments, and its influence reached far into the Nixon administration and the American intelligence community. It was all straight out of Lenin.

Even though I had already defected from the left, I did not want to be any part of such developments. It was one thing to reject the left; it was quite another to embrace what appeared to be this kind of right — one that trampled over defenseless people, making their lives even more miserable than they had been. Nor was there any particular reason for me to do so. It was perfectly possible for me to have concluded that the schemes of the left were utopian and could result in great social disasters and grotesque crimes without jumping to the opposite conclusion that the sadism of military dictators was a proper or even preferable alternative.

Another reflex familiar in the thought patterns of progressives like myself was to avert one’s eyes from bad news when it came from the left. Too much was at stake in each revolutionary enterprise, which was really a harbinger of human possibility. The enemies of promise would use every socialist failing to kill the socialist dream, and thus hope itself. For this reason, I was paying as little attention as I could to the fate of the revolution that inspired Allende and the Chilean left. This was Castro’s revolution in Cuba, which also had been one of the primary inspirations for the American new left, but for many years had been going from bad to worse. I was not unaware that Cuba was having problems, but I ascribed them mainly to the machinations of the two evil empires — Washington and Moscow.

At the end of the ’70s, however, I saw a documentary film about Castro’s revolution made by Cuban filmmaker Nestor Almendros, who had left the island in 1963. Almendros was an Academy Award-winning cinematographer whose credits included “Sophie’s Choice,” “Kramer vs. Kramer” and “Days of Heaven.” His documentary about Cuba was called “Improper Conduct,” and it focused on the Cuban government’s treatment of homosexuals as a metaphor for its treatment of all social and political deviance. It was a stunning indictment of what the revolution had become. One scene that conveyed its power was an on-camera interview of a black Cuban exile on a street in New York’s Harlem. The exile was a flamboyant homosexual, in his early 20s, dressed in a tangerine satin shirt open to the sternum and white flared trousers. The interviewer asked him whether he liked the freedom he had found in America and in Harlem. With a broad smile, he answered he did. The interviewer asked why. He said, “I am free here. In Cuba I could be arrested just for being dressed like this, and put in jail for six months.” The interviewer said: “How many times were you arrested?” The Cuban answered: “17.”

This was not a political person. This was one of those ordinary Cubans on whom history was inflicted, and with it the drama that socialist intellectuals had created. If this was what the revolution represented to a Cuban like him, what did that say about the ideals to which I had been so devoted? The island now had a lower per capita income than in 1959, when Castro took power. The political prisons were full. Hundreds of thousands had fled. Hundreds of thousands more were waiting to flee. Castro had turned Cuba into a national prison.

Ten years after I saw Almendros’ film, an election was held in Chile. Pinochet was ending his military rule and restoring Chilean democracy. A national referendum, authorized by Pinochet, would be held to pronounce judgment on his own regime. Even the left would have the right to field a candidate. Pinochet had always justified his military regime as a temporary measure — in much the same way that Castro had defended the revolutionary dictatorship. It was necessary to defend the regime, restore stability and create the economic foundations of a true democracy.

Under the 15 years of Pinochet’s rule, Chile had prospered so greatly that it was dubbed the “miracle economy,” one of the two or three richest in Latin America. It provided a stark contrast to Castro’s achievement. In 1959 Cuba had been the second richest economy in Latin America, but in the 25 years since had become one of the three poorest. While Pinochet was holding his referendum, Castro was approached by socialists in Europe to hold a similar election that would create a democratic regime in Cuba. He refused.

The results of Pinochet’s referendum were instructive. If Pinochet had won, he would have become the new president of a democratic Chile. But Chileans rejected Pinochet and elected a more moderate candidate who was not of the left. True to his word, Pinochet stepped down. His dictatorship had indeed been a temporary measure to restore Chile’s stability, prosperity and democracy.

These developments prompted me to take another look at the events that had taken place after Allende’s election and his attempt to institute radical programs that led to a mini-civil war and the coup. I had long since become suspicious of the idea that the CIA was a kind of deus ex machina that explained this result. The CIA surely had a finger in the pot, but it had become clear over time that there were real limits to what the CIA could accomplish. It had not, for example, been able to overthrow Castro despite 30 years of trying. It could not even oust the Marxist dictator of a mini-state like Granada, or a drug lord in its own employ like Panama’s Manuel Noriega. These removals required military invasions. And Chile was not a tiny island or an isthmus nation but a relatively large country, with a long-standing democratic tradition.

An article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal shortly after Pinochet’s recent arrest summarizes what I discovered: “Salvador Allende reached the presidency of Chile in 1970 with only 36 percent of the vote, barely 40,000 votes ahead of the candidate of the right. In Mr. Allende’s 1,000 days of rule, Chile degenerated into what the much-lionized former Chilean President Eduardo Frei Montalva (father of the current president) called a ‘carnival of madness’ … The Chilean Supreme Court, the Bar Association and the leftist Medical Society, along with the Chamber of Deputies and provincial heads of the Christian Democrat Party, all warned that Allende was systematically trampling the law and constitution. By August 1973, more than a million Chileans — half the work force — were on strike, demanding that Allende go. Transport and industry were paralyzed. On Sept. 11, 1973, the armed forces acted to oust Allende, going into battle against his gunslingers. Six hours after the fighting erupted, Allende blew his head off in the presidential palace with an AK-47 given to him by Fidel Castro.”

Forty years of history have left us with this perspective on two regimes. Castro bankrupted his country, tyrannized its inhabitants and is now the longest ruling dictator in the world. Pinochet presided over his own ruthless dictatorship for 15 years, created a booming economy and restored democracy to Chile. If one had to choose between a Castro and a Pinochet, from the point of view of the poor, the victimized and the oppressed, the choice would not be difficult. As an American conservative, however, I don’t even have to do that. It was Chileans, not Henry Kissinger or Richard Nixon, who made the real decision to put Pinochet in power. Unlike the American left, which passionately supported Fidel Castro and denied the realities of the oppressive state, the American right’s sympathies for Pinochet were muted, and did not involve blindness to the stringencies of his rule. In short, Pinochet’s dictatorship does not compromise any conservative expectations in the way that Castro’s dictatorship compromises the visions of the left.

Imprisoning Pinochet on a foreign trip to seek medical help is one of those bad ideas of progressives that will come back to bite them. Consider the prospect for Castro when he ventures abroad for parallel reasons. Yet, on second thought, perhaps the idea does work from a partisan perspective. Because what made Pinochet vulnerable to this kind of arrest is that he had voluntarily retired from his dictatorial regime. There is no danger of Castro doing that.

David Horowitz is a conservative writer and activist.

No place to hide

The arrest of the brutal ex-dictator Pinochet marks the first time since Nuremberg that a head of state faces legal responsibility for his mass killings.

  • more
    • All Share Services

When General and Senator-for-Life Augusto Pinochet was arrested on a Spanish warrant in his London hospital bed this week, his lawyer announced that he would appeal Pinochet’s extradition in both Madrid and Great Britain. The lawyer, Michale Caplan, made his statement without irony — even though among the crimes Pinochet is charged with in Spain is ordering the gunpoint “extradition” of Spanish citizens in Chile to Argentine death squads. The general now seeks appeals he never granted individuals like the great songwriter Victor Jara, whose hands were shattered by torturers’ rifle butts and who was shot in a summary execution by Pinochet’s soldiers in the Santiago soccer stadium during the general’s 1973 coup: just one among still-uncounted thousands of Chileans and foreigners brutalized and massacred during Pinochet’s 25 years in power.

For anyone who came of political age later than the 1970s, it may be difficult to appreciate the transcontinental emotions evoked by Pinochet’s arrest. An elderly ex-dictator is served with an extradition warrant on his hospital bed. So what? But Pinochet was not just any dictator, and this is not just any arrest — indeed, Pinochet’s arrest may be in its own way as significant as his long and violent rule of Chile.

In 1970, Chileans elected moderate socialist Salvador Allende Gossens as president of the oldest constitutional republic in Latin America. With the Vietnam War still raging, with Richard Nixon in the White House and with the only other Marxist government in the American hemisphere headed by dictator Fidel Castro in Cuba, the democratic election of Allende, with his humane agenda, became a radical touchstone. “It was our high-water mark,” writes journalist Marc Cooper, who after being thrown out of the California state college system by Gov. Ronald Reagan went to work for Allende as a translator. But it was a short-lived dream. On Sept. 4, 1973, after months of unrest bankrolled by the CIA, the Chilean military, under Pinochet, took power, bombing the presidential palace and arresting thousands. Allende committed suicide during the coup.

Pinochet’s coup was in its way as much a touchstone as Allende’s election: As Cooper has written, in its sustained brutality, the Pinochet dictatorship was the prototype for the coups and death-squad regimes that over the next few years held sway in El Salvador, Guatemala, East Timor and elsewhere. Pinochet enjoyed such support from the United States that in 1976, he felt bold enough to send secret police agents to Washington to assassinate former Allende aide Orlando Letelier. And the Chicago-School free-market nostrums imposed by Pinochet on Chile’s mixed economy were a touchstone of another sort: the first experiment in the radical “shock therapy” model later applied by Margaret Thatcher in Britain, favored by Reagan for the United States and gleefully imposed by comfortable American economic theorists across Eastern Europe, with results visible in Russia today.

Yet if Pinochet’s 1973 coup was a political watershed, in a strange turn of historical fortune his arrest, at age 82, now seems to mark a quantum step forward for human rights law. His detention marks the first time since Nuremberg that a head of state faces legal responsibility for the crimes committed in his name. This is neither an extension of a government’s power beyond its boundaries — like the famous Israeli kidnapping of Adolph Eichmann — nor the sort of rough justice meted out to Anastasio Somoza, the former Nicaraguan dictator who was blown up after he fled the Sandinistas in 1979. The process now under way in Spain — where Judges Baltasar Garzon and Manuel Garcia Castellon charged Pinochet Tuesday with genocide and terrorism in addition to the murders of Spaniards — is a systematic judicial process to hold a criminal accountable.

This orderly process is possible in part because the laws of Spain and other European countries allow crime victims to be represented by their own lawyers in criminal trials. It is the families of Pinochet’s Spanish victims, backed up by human rights groups like Amnesty International, that have pushed Spain’s courts over several years for the investigations now bearing fruit. And the laws of Western European countries allow charges to be brought against anyone, anywhere in the world, who commits crimes against their respective nationals — an idea the United States has only begun to incorporate through recent anti-terrorism laws.

The Pinochet case is also possible because of legal arguments carefully crafted over the last decade by human rights lawyers in the United States. In 1991, the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York decided to take advantage of a new law, the Alien Tort Claims Act, permitting people harmed by foreign governments to file civil suit in U.S. Courts. CCR took on the case of Salvadorans and Guatemalans murdered at the behest of those nations’ military leaders. In the course of the suits — which CCR won — attorney Peter Weiss argued that certain state crimes are so heinous that “those who commit them find no sanctuary in national boundaries,” as Weiss’ colleague Michael Ratner told me this week. In other words, a thug like Pinochet is an enemy of all humanity, who can be prosecuted or sued wherever the legal system allows victims access to the courts.

More than anything else, what’s changed is the role of human rights groups, now actively pushing governments like Spain to pursue genocide prosecutions. Those governments, in turn, are turning to the international arena — whether through vehicles like the European Union’s extradition and human rights treaties or the proposed International Court for Human Rights, which the Clinton administration has been working assiduously to water down. Human rights advocacy — once confined to postcard writing, lobbying and the occasional embassy picket — has gone global, slowly building a body of legal precedent across national boundaries.

Whether Augusto Pinochet will ever stand in the dock for his manifold barbaric crimes remains to be seen. Spain’s government has yet to officially approve the extradition warrant; British Home Secretary Jack Straw must approve the extradition and the case faces appeal up to the House of Lords. British newspapers report that the U.S. State Department is quietly working to squelch Pinochet’s extradition, perhaps for fear of damaging revelations about the U.S. role, or perhaps because the simple precedent of a head of state arrested for human rights crimes by a third country sends shivers down the spines of government apparatchiks of any great power.

But even if Pinochet is never tried, the simple fact that after 25 years he has landed within striking distance of justice has brought relieved and celebratory tears to the eyes of a generation both in and out of Chile, to whom he represented both the betrayal of a dream and the inauguration of a nightmare.

Continue Reading Close

Bruce Shapiro is national correspondent for Salon News.

Waiting for Fidel

Waiting for Fidel: An excerpt from Christopher Hunt's revealing new book about Cuba.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Boris seemed an odd name for a mulatto tall enough to touch ceilings. It made more sense when he explained his father’s infatuation with all things Soviet around the time of his birth in the mid-1960s. Since then he had sprouted a mustache thick enough to cover his upper lip. The growth garbled his speech. One phrase, however, stuck out: “No hay problema.”

No problem. In our first half-hour Boris repeated it no less than a dozen times. Every iteration increased my concern that there was, in fact, a significant problem with our deal.

“Are you sure I can rent your apartment?”

“No problem.”

“It’s not against the law?”

“No problem.”

“And the neighbors won’t report me?”

Boris’s answers probably would have differed little had I asked whether Castro killed Kennedy. The gangly giant had just wrapped his fingers around a wad of my dollars. In a country where monthly wages were averaging less than eight bucks, the prospect of returning several twenty-dollar bills could probably breed tales taller than Everest. “No problem” would be repeated until I was in trouble or out of twenties.

The look of my lodgings did little for my confidence. Years had passed since paint touched the outside of the four-story block. Laundry hung from rusted balconies. Shutters dangled at unnatural angles. Moving to the front door, I found that plywood had replaced glass in the frame. Bulbs intended to light the spiral of stairs either didn’t work or didn’t exist.

A gate of iron bars guarded the fourth-floor apartment. The front door had two bolts. Both the door and the gate, warned Boris, were to be locked at all times. Before returning to his in-laws’ home, where his family of three would bunk until my departure, Boris added a final thought.

“Don’t let anybody in the door.”

“Who’s going to come to the door?”

“Nobody. But don’t let him in.”

Maybe the bogeymen were imaginary. The dangers inside the dank apartment were real. A trial of the television in the uncarpeted living room produced a blizzard of specks. In the kitchen, a coffin-size refrigerator alternately groaned to life and rattled to a halt. Running the water required twisting a faucet beyond the bars guarding the window.

The stove was no less idiosyncratic. Nothing happened when I turned on the gas. I remembered the taped rod hanging behind the stove. Boris had shown me how scraping the metal tip against a burner created a spark. He hadn’t pointed out that the rod was attached to a wire inserted in a socket. Grabbing the exposed end of the homemade lighter shot a disconcerting ZZZTTT up my forearm.

The bathroom was no easier to operate. An attachment the shape of a can took the place of a standard shower head. A sliding lever allowed bathers to select cold, warm, or hot water, which Boris promised would gush. My test of the warm setting produced a dribble. Hopeful that less heat would mean more volume, I reached a wet hand up to the lever. ZZZTTT.

I lay on the bed and retraced the steps that had brought me from the Cuban mission in New York to the apartment in Havana. The backtracking lasted until the voice of a woman wafted in the windows, which opened onto an air shaft. She sounded strong, though not particularly young. I never learned her name or, in the weeks I spent a few feet above her window, saw her face. I did, however, know the name of her lover.

“Lazaro.” Twenty or so seconds later she repeated the name. “Lazaro.”

The woman reiterated the name in octaves high and low. The decibels also varied. Embarrassed by my sightless voyeurism, I wondered whether an awareness of her audience would alter the woman’s course. And what about Lazaro? How would Lazaro feel about my tuning in to his lovemaking?

The woman increased her vocabulary. First came “mi amor.” “My love” was joined by other sounds of Cuban passion, some intelligible, others not. Words devolved to grunts. These ended, leaving the three of us in a sweaty, midday silence.

For a time, meeting Fidel Castro took a back seat to another priority. I had found a home. What I hadn’t found was a level of comfort. I felt strange in Cuba, like a man sleepwalking through somebody else’s dream. To snap out of it, I forced myself out the door and into my new neighborhood.

The grid called Vedado was filled mostly by two-story homes. The original owners had decorated the faces of their homes with moldings, ledges, and other frills. Iron gates separated cramped yards from numbered streets and lettered avenues. Covered verandahs provided a place to unwind. Through doors left open for ventilation, I spied high-ceilinged parlors built in another era.

Remnants of high times contrasted with the streets’ torpor. Vedado was dead. The roads were traffic-free. On the edges, parked cars had gathered weeks of dust. The heat kept most Cubans off of narrow sidewalks cracked beyond repair. Those who did venture outdoors moved slowly, their eyes cast down. The alternative was sitting in the shade and staring at the heavy air.

That was the choice of the rash of people who had set up tables at the end of their walkways. Hand-drawn signs advertised homemade sweets and savories. Scraps of cardboard attached to fences announced the availability of sofas, chairs, and kitchenware. A notice tacked to a tree in front of one colonial home said: “I’m selling a crib and children’s clothing. Used but in good shape. Ring the bell.”

The density of enterprise increased near the Hotel Nacional. A middle-age man spread battered books on wooden racks as well as the sidewalk. Titles included “An Interview with Fidel,” “Fidel and Religion,” and “On the March with Fidel.” Another vendor had stretched secondhand records on his patch of pavement. A family of four took advantage of their location opposite a row of state stores by roping off an area in which they guarded shoppers’ bicycles.

The grass-roots capitalism supported Boris’s lecture on Cuban economic reform. The shift, said my landlord, dated to the 1989 collapse of the Soviet Union. Overnight, Moscow cut annual subsidies worth about $5 billion. Trade with the Eastern bloc, which had accounted for nearly all of the island’s commerce, evaporated. Cuba stuck to its communist guns — central planning over private enterprise, rationed goods instead of shopping sprees. Output dropped by a third over the next four years.

Then the Party’s line wavered. Its coffers all but empty, the state permitted mechanics, plumbers, and other tradesmen to sell their services. Cubans were allowed to hold dollars for the first time in more than thirty years. Later, the government sanctioned farmers’ markets. More liberalization, including the right to rent out apartments, followed as part of a policy known as “the Opening.”

“Doesn’t sound like communism,” I said.

“Cuba is a confusing place,” agreed Boris.

Proof came at a shaded food stand whose proprietors, a bony man and a fleshy woman, had nodded off. They awakened as I looked over the two plates on their table. Both featured potatoes that had been mashed, balled, and fried. While I chewed one of the pasty balls, the vendor, a retired librarian, filled me in on the birth of their business. State rations left them hungry. Inflation made their pensions meaningless. The pair had no choice but to set up shop. The results?

“There’s a lot of competition,” said the man.

“It’s not easy,” said his wife.

La Lucha,” he sighed.

“The Struggle,” mimicked his wife.

I asked the price of the potato ball. “Three pesos.”

That’s when I realized I had no cash. Rather, no Cuban cash. I held out a dollar bill. Emptying his pocket, the vendor found just a few coins; their sum fell far short of the exchange rate, which I didn’t know.

“You can pay me later. Or tomorrow. We are here every day, all day.”

“The Struggle,” sighed his wife.

I learned more about capitalism, Cuban style, near Old Havana. A cluster of men gathered in a tight circle in the plaza of Central Park. Judging from the boisterous shouts and shaking fists, they were watching a brawl. Closer, I saw that the crowd was focused on two men faced off like cocks in a pit.

A black man in a faded yellow tank top pushed his face to within inches of his opponent’s nose. His brown eyes widened. Smooth features contorted. One palm extended outward, as if pleading for reason. The other hand flapped like a bronco. His point made, the aggressor planted his feet and folded his arms.

The adversary, a stocky man in a checked shirt, sprang to life. Arms spread, veins popping, he launched an oral bombardment that looked likely to end in fisticuffs or apoplexy. Communism versus capitalism? Is there a God? The chainsaw buzz of their Spanish made it impossible for me to tell the stakes.

I turned to a sturdy youth who was also watching the debate. Broad shoulders and a square jaw gave him the air of an athlete. A button-down shirt, khaki pants, and tasseled loafers were pure Brooks Brothers.

“What are they arguing about?”

“Baseball.”

“This is about baseball?”

“Baseball is very serious for Cubans. Do you want to buy cigars?”

“No. Thanks.”

“Cuban cigars are very good, very famous.”

“I don’t smoke.”

“Maybe you have friends who smoke.”

The dapper hustler, Luis, also told me to watch my step. Matching my slow strides across the park, he warned that the streets of Havana were filled with cigar dealers. Most sold phony stogies. He, on the other hand, insisted that he had the real deal: “My uncle works in a cigar factory. They give cigars to the workers. But my uncle needs money more than he needs cigars. So we sell them to tourists. Good quality.”

When not hustling, the twenty-two-year-old worked at the airport. His dismal salary — the equivalent of six dollars a month — barely dented the cost of supporting his wife and infant son. So Luis became a “businessman.” Cigars were his main line. His sideline was befriending foreigners in the hope of getting cash and clothes. That didn’t make him a thief. Nor did he hurt people. Others were less scrupulous.

Luis took my notebook and asked for a pen. The young mulatto opened the back cover and began to scribble. Speaking as he wrote, he said that new words were entering the Cuban vocabulary. To understand the new lexicon was to understand Cuba. Luis finished writing and handed back the notebook, now filled with the local lingo.

Wanikiki meant money. Fula was a more specific way to refer to dollars. These were usually found in the possession of a papirici, a word that combined the words for “papa” and “rich.” A jinetero, Spanish for “jockey,” was a guy looking to separate a papirici from his wanikiki. The process of doing so was el fuego. “The fire,” literally.

“So you’re a jinetero,” I said.

“These days, all Cubans are jineteros.”

Luis asked if I needed a taxi to take me home. I did. The afternoon sun had drained my energy. What I didn’t need was to pour more money into a state cab like the one that charged
me twenty dollars — three times Luis’s monthly pay — for a ride from the airport.

“No problem,” said Luis. “I’ll get you a taxi for Cubans.”

Luis surveyed the vehicles stationed along the rim of Central Park. Cardboard signs hand-printed TAXI rested inside the windscreens of battered American classics and slightly less battered Soviet buckets. Luis approached a Lada idling in the shade. The seated driver listened hard as the hustler spoke. The chat ended with the Cubans shaking hands and beckoning me to board the front seat.

“He will take you home for three dollars,” Luis announced.

Cooled by the breeze created by the Lada’s movement along the Malecon, I looked at the driver. The sun had burnished an indelible tan as well as dozens of lines on his gaunt face. Scarred arms and rough hands identified the man as a manual laborer. I wondered how he could afford a car.

“I earned it by cutting sugarcane,” he said.

“It must take a lot of cane to pay for a car.”

“I was one of Cuba’s best cane cutters.”

The driver explained that the state motivated workers with promises of goods. Televisions were common rewards for top workers. The big prize was a car. The country’s best cane cutter got one for free. Lesser standouts won the right to buy a vehicle. Named to his province’s all-star team in 1981, he paid for the Lada by pooling his savings with loans from friends.

Havana’s fleet of free-lance taxis was rife with similar success stories. The drivers of the Soviet bloc autos were men who had played and won the government’s game. In the weeks that followed, crack factory workers drove me to Old Havana. Top-notch bureaucrats brought me back. So did military heroes. In other words, model communists were leading the capitalist charge.

“Three dollars is a lot,” I noted at the end of the ride.

“Gas is very expensive in Cuba. Ninety cents, American cents, for one liter.”

“How many liters did you just use?”

“One.”

“So your profit is two dollars.”

“Only one. I have to give one dollar to your friend.”

My friend? The meeting in the park. The stuff about Cubans surfing the changing economy. Had any of the banter been genuine?

I handed over the fare. The cane cutter passed the notes from his right hand into his left. Raising his index finger on his free hand, he leaned across the seat. Rather than thank me, the driver offered a broader view on dollar-wielding outsiders: “In Cuba, you are Jesus.”

“Do you have a light?”

“What?”

“A light.”

“No. Sorry.”

The dark-skinned woman stayed put. Standing flush against the rim of my bar stool, she waited, as if I might remember a matchbook buried in my pocket’s lint. Or maybe she expected chivalry. Fidel Castro had promised social, political, and economic equality for women. But did progress excuse a comrade from helping a lady?

Yes or no, this lady was a fire hazard. She nibbled thick lips painted scarlet. The swatch of color floated amid a stretch of chestnut skin that began at her forehead and ended at the neck line of a white leotard that hugged curves normally found in centerfolds. She held my stare for several elongated seconds before moving away, slowly, and casting a last look over her shoulder.

Physically, the second woman to approach my bar stool had little in common with the first. A brown mane spilled past the edges of green eyes and an inviting grin. The hair came to rest on toasted shoulders left bare by a cocktail dress. Silver sequins covered, though just barely, buttocks raised three inches by black spiked heels. She, like her predecessor, wanted a light from an American barfly.

“I don’t smoke,” I said.

“Do you like to dance?”

“I don’t know how.”

Dumb answer. The music blasting from linebacker-size speakers wasn’t salsa. Born in the USA, the tunes called for nothing trickier than a wiggle and a bounce. What’s more, the girl in the cocktail dress probably wasn’t looking for Fred Astaire. She may not even have wanted a light. I would never know. Two clipped answers were enough to scare off one feline Cuban.

There were plenty more like her. I struggled not to stare at a mulatta wearing a black evening gown, the bleached blonde whose behind just about burst its Lycra casing, and the rest of the parade of head-turners populating Hotel Comodoro’s nightclub. Deconstructed, the women provided a catalogue of undulating hair, painted lips, and unhidable curves. Reassembled, they were a harem.

“Impressive, isn’t it,” said a voice behind me.

The slightest of accents told me that Peter had returned. Turning, I found his familiar blue eyes and dirty blond hair. The German’s doughy face cracked a sinister smile that spread to my mouth.

“Unbelievable,” I replied.

A resident of Havana, Peter was teaching me about living large in Cuba. He started by instructing me on eating in paladares, private restaurants in the homes of Cubans willing to let foreigners masticate in their living rooms and on their terraces. He also told me about the wave of European and Latino businessmen streaming into Havana. “Everybody can see this should be a great place to do business. Their education system has produced a big pool of well-educated people.” The German’s true love, however, was cars.

No newcomer could miss the automobiles cruising the capital. Paint weathered, bodies dented, windshields cracked like spider webs, classic Fords and Chevrolets clattered along the Malecon every few minutes. Engines minted back when Americans liked Ike rumbled like outboard motors. Maneuverability? Sherman tanks sprung to mind. That the beasts from Detroit moved at all was nothing short of a miracle.

Not so the Buick convertible in which Peter had picked me up. A smooth layer of red coated the car’s unblemished hide. The chrome grill caught and magnified the lights above the street. The convertible’s soft top exposed shiny red seats. White wall tires were the final touch to a flawless flashback. The German revved the engine and hit the car’s mighty horn.

The cherubic entrepreneur blasted his klaxon again when the Buick passed a billboard on the Malecon. Painted in full view of the so-called U.S. Interests Section, America’s unofficial embassy in Havana, the propaganda showed a hopping mad Uncle Sam reacting to the taunts of another cartoon figure. One hand gripping a rifle, the other cupped beside his mouth, a Cuban soldier was shouting, “Imperialists, we have absolutely no fear of you.”

Resettled on the bar stool beside mine, Peter demonstrated his mastery of things Cuban. Standing halfway around the bar from our spot was a woman who, while not beautiful, dripped sexuality. An eruption of kinked brown hair and swollen painted lips took back seat to a figure that punished the seams of a skimpy sleeveless top cut from black leather. Swaying to the throbbing beat, she scanned the crowd with the concentration of a big-game hunter. Her eyes landed on two of the bar’s smaller fry.

“Got a light?” said the slight lift of her unlit cigarette.

“Of course,” replied Peter’s cool nod.

The vamp swaggered her way around the bar. She placed the cigarette between her lips and waited for Peter, a nonsmoker, to produce a lighter and ignite its end. She closed her eyes to draw in the first breath and took pains to pucker her lips for the extended exhalation that followed. Only then did she introduce herself. And only to Peter.

Just as well. No small-talker in English, I saw no hope of learning the nonstop banter that came naturally to Cubans. Peter chattered like a native, leaving me to wonder what was going on. Had I died and gone to heaven? Or was there something else at work?

“Are these girls prostitutes?” I asked after the woman excused herself with a gentle stroke of Peter’s thigh.

“No.”

“Then why are they all so … friendly?”

“Cuban women know what they want,” was the start of the answer.

The rest took more explaining. Cubans, he said, had just enough money to survive. Extras — clothing, for example — were beyond the means of most locals. Foreigners, on the other hand, came to Cuba flush with cash. They were met by small-time hustlers selling cigars or renting rooms. Long on desire but short on cash, the ladies prowled through the night for their slice of the pie. Known as jineteras, they sought sugar daddies to buy a drink tonight, dinner tomorrow, and perhaps new shoes and a dress in between.

Peter insisted that the Cubans in the nightclub were nice girls. Several were known to be the daughters of Party officials. The rest came from good families, the type that read books and said prayers. Virtually all had studied at a university. Breeding didn’t mean they weren’t (a) young and (b) restless.

“That girl who was just here, the one with the black …” Peter struggled to define the top, which covered more than a bra but less than a vest. “She has a master’s degree in engineering.”

I wasn’t the only one marveling at the quantity of life in Cuba.

“The name’s Karl” was how the man beside me on the inbound flight introduced himself. I had barely turned to register my neighbor’s features — gray and thinning hair, a tummy that heaved with every breath, and a fleshy face given to avuncular grins — when he began filling me in on his life. British, he directed artsy films whose grit had caught the eye of Cuba’s movie makers, who invited him to attend their annual film festival.

I next saw Karl in the polished lobby of the Hotel Nacional. The Brit raved about the cast of characters he had encountered in the bar. There was an Italian trader and a cameraman from a U.S. television network. The former was negotiating an import contract. The latter was spreading a rumor that Washington and Havana were about to normalize relations. Then there was Barnaby, an American who had come to Cuba to write about martinis.

More indigenous delights were on Barnaby’s mind when we met that evening. Lean and balding, the fortyish man lifted his elbows from the oak bar and introduced himself. Then he introduced the bow-tied bartender as well as the mojitos, a blend of rum, sugar, seltzer, and a mintlike leaf called hierba buena. “Local specialty,” informed the American. “Hemingway loved mojitos.”

Entranced by mythical Cuba, Barnaby waxed nostalgic about vintage cars. Plymouths and DeSotos took him back to an era when men were called Mack and gas cost a nickel. He segued to the capital’s colonial architecture. From there he moved on to the island’s wondrous cigars, one of which he lifted from the pocket of his blazer. Preferring a light from the barman to his own book of matches, the man puffed his long stogie and asked, aloud, whether it was all a dream.

“Dreamy” described 1830, the place Barnaby wanted to dine. Carried by one of the gypsy cabs that hovered outside the Nacional, we arrived at the colonial mansion turned government restaurant. Decorative columns and an oversize doorway preceded an airy, ornate foyer. A broad staircase spiraled up to a second floor. Dead ahead lay the parquet floor of the main room.

A grand piano took center stage. At its keyboard sat a severe, dark-haired woman moonlighting from one of Havana’s orchestras. Her soft, classical melodies warmed a room whose walls glowed with fresh white paint. A mammoth mirror framed in gold reflected a room with roughly twenty tables covered by white cloths.

The waiter matched the linen. Dressed in a jacket too broad for his bony shoulders, he couldn’t hide his fatigue as he sagged to a stop beside our table. But the place wasn’t about service; the waiter needed five minutes to find a corkscrew and another three to grasp its operation. Nor was it about food; high schools served better chicken than 1830. We were paying for ambiance; the room felt like a salon worthy of Gatsby.

After dinner Barnaby steered us to the Cohiba Hotel, a glassy tower overlooking the Caribbean swells. Breezing past a pair of hotel guards, he made a beeline for a lounge raised three steps above the lobby. The place was packed. Only a fraction, maybe a third, of the barflies were men, all foreign, mostly middle-age. Circled around them, like satellites to planets, were dozens and dozens of women. Few looked over twenty-five. None rated less than a double take.

Merciless scrutiny welcomed newcomers. Aggressive eye contact awaited men who made the grade. Heads turned quickly from males with the wrong plumage. The ocular rubdown made me squirm.

Not so Barnaby. Emboldened by a daiquiri (“Hemingway loved daiquiris”) and a cigar called Cohiba (“Castro’s brand”), the writer sidled up to two women at the bar. Karl joined them. Neither man tried to mask his lack of Spanish. Nor did they hide their interest in the superior view of four breasts, a brownish pair left exposed by the sunken neckline of a yellow sundress and a whiter set framed by the tight, square cut of a black velvet gown.

The women leaned back. They giggled at the men’s attempts at communication via gesticulation. Barnaby bought a round of drinks. The girls giggled some more. Barnaby bought more drinks.

I found myself sandwiched by two teenagers. Each grabbed an arm. One asked, “Can we stand near you?” The pair stuck to my ribs as a hotel employee wearing a blazer and carrying a walkie-talkie passed within inches of us. The girls released me only once the coast was clear.

“If we are not with a tourist, he makes us leave,” said a stocky girl with alabaster skin. Her svelte friend nodded.

“Is it worth the trouble to be near tourists?”

“Cuban men aren’t interesting.”

“They aren’t?”

“They have no wanikiki.”

Barnaby interrupted. Having reached a linguistic impasse, he needed help. Kati, the girl in the gown, seemed interested in dancing. Could I confirm?

Kati placed her hands around mine. She slid one leg over the other, a motion that pushed her dress to one side and exposed a stretch of black lace. When her face was just inches from mine, the woman moistened her painted lips and said, “Tell your friend seventy-five.”

“Seventy-five?”

“Seventy-five dollars.”

“For…?”

Kati pulled back. She glared. Was I trying to humiliate her by forcing her to spell it out? Or did I really not know what she was proposing? She clarified her wishes by twirling her hair and arching her back. I hesitated to relay the message that dancing wasn’t all that Kati had in mind.

Barnaby clearly relished his romantic vision of Cuba. Would the news that Kati admired his wallet, not his charm, shatter the illusion? On the other hand, who was I to interfere with a changing economy? I condoned Cubans selling cars and cigars. Shouldn’t Kati get similar approval? Saddened to see flesh for hire, I wouldn’t judge her choice.

“Ask your friend if he wants two,” said Kati’s sidekick.

“Two what?”

“Two girls.”

I felt out of place among the gang of men banging around Havana. Autos didn’t interest me. Salsa did, but I couldn’t dance.

Try though I did to let the colonial setting carry me back in time, I failed. I wondered whether there were any alternatives to the neoimperialist fun.

Defunct streetlights outside the Cohiba meant that I had to head home in the dark. Frightened by what sounded like a scream, I spotted a lanky youth vomiting on the sidewalk. Doubled over, arms wrapped around his midriff, he moaned steadily until he heard my footsteps. He stood up, said “Rum,” and bent over again for another purge.

Alcohol wasn’t his only problem. Accompanying me along an avenue called Linea, Jorge said that he was a student. English was his major and, with a big exam coming up, he was worried about passing. Did he want my help? No, he had a tutor, a woman who had completed the course at the University of Havana. But she was part of the problem.

Three times a week Jorge lugged his books to the tutor’s home. Three times a week he vowed to buckle down and study. Three times a week he failed to crack a book. The student found the teacher irresistibly sexy. She felt likewise. The pair spent their tutorials making love instead of learning English.

“Cuban men can make love five times in one night,” said Jorge. “How about American men?”

“Something like that.”

“Have you ever been with a Cuban girl?”

My answer shocked the boozed-up student. A determination to initiate me renewed his energy. Jorge strode down the street until we reached a sign that said Joker. “It’s a discotheque,” he said. “A Cuban discotheque.” Forgetting the imminent exam as well as his rotted gut, he pulled me down a flight of stairs leading to a basement.

The wooden door closed behind us and I found myself in utter darkness. Jorge vanished. Heated by a mass of bodies I could sense but not see, the clammy air fogged my eyeglasses. I could just about make out silhouettes until flashes of strobe light blinded me. A minute passed before I felt safe enough to take a second step.

Left, I saw a corps of twenty Cubans — men in tank tops, women in halters, everybody in a sweat — writhing to the thumping conga. Others did their thing against a wall. Three men in their late teens slouched and bumped their pelvises while three girls ground their rears into the thrusts. Moving toward the roomier, right side of the club, I knocked into a couple pressed face-to-face. Two men turned and smiled before resuming their mutual exploration.

The tender of a battered bar was conducting a probe of his own. Dressed in shorts and a T-shirt, the wiry youth couldn’t see his customers. The reason? His eyes were closed. Had they been open, they would have seen no further than the face of the teenage girl whose grip on his neck improved her leverage on his lips. Trying to catch his eye and order two shots of rum, I found myself staring at hips rocking in time to the hands up her skirt.

“What’s your name?” demanded a thin mulatta with a tattoo on her bare shoulders. “Why aren’t you dancing?”

I said again, stupidly, that I couldn’t dance.

“I’m going to Cubanize you.”

Would Cubanization hurt? The girl yanked me into the sea of dancers. Faced off, my hands in hers, I was expected to lead. I froze. Stunned by the sight of the truth — I really couldn’t dance — she reverted to remedial measures. Firm hands grabbed my hips. Pulling me into contact with her pelvis, the teenager began to rock gently, steadily, in time to the music. Self-consciousness doomed my earlier efforts to get in sync; gyrating with a girl I had known less than a minute felt queer.

“Move,” she whispered. “Move.”

I tried. Then I stopped trying. Then I tried to forget that I was an American in Cuba, that I was a stiff in the land of rhythm, that I was … I lost track of the reasons that I couldn’t enjoy myself. Instead I focused on the rhythm of the teenager. And the sound of the salsa.

Continue Reading Close

Christopher Hunt is the author of "Sparring with Charlie: Motorbiking down the Ho Chi Minh Trail." He has been a reporter for the Wall Street Journal and the Economist.

Newsreal: The odd couple

The pope's upcoming visit to Cuba and meeting with Fidel Castro is being depicted as a sort of ideological shootout: believer vs. atheist, Catholic vs. Communist, Old World vs. New. But the reality is much more complex.

  • more
    • All Share Services

Pope John Paul II is coming to Cuba. The pope who helped liberate the Soviet empire is the guest of the world’s last Marxist hero. An unlikely pair, yes. And why not?

Americans, especially non-Catholic Americans, tend to admire this pope. A former Time magazine “Man of the Year,” he seems exceptional among world leaders — a man of fierce moral principle who speaks his mind. Americans, too, see him as the anti-communist pope, the Polish freedom fighter who provided critical support for the Solidarity trade union movement that overthrew the communist regime there.

But this same anti-communist pope has also been a fierce critic of capitalism — particularly the cruelties and social Darwinism of the free-market economy.

The Polish pope belongs more to the communal East. After demonstrations against his papacy in Holland and Germany in the 1980s, one sensed his growing disdain toward the individualist and decadent West. Financially, the church worldwide is largely supported by the United States and by Germany, by dollars and deutsch marks. But the great strides for Catholicism are being taken in the Third World, in Africa and Asia and in a resurgent Eastern Europe. Not in the West.

Fidel Castro was raised a Catholic in a Cuba that blended Roman orthodoxy and Afro-Caribbean Santeria; he attended Catholic schools. Despite his murderous cruelty, there remains something almost Victorian about Castro’s Havana today, by comparison to the bawdy pre-revolutionary years.

If he were alive, Graham Greene, the great Catholic novelist, who flirted with left-wing causes in Latin America, would doubtless enjoy the spectacle of Castro and the anti-communist pope embracing. For all of their differences, these two men understand each other culturally. Castro is recognizable to the pope in ways that, say, President Clinton — a Protestant, individualist and capitalist — is not.

Last summer, John Paul was reported to be deeply moved by the large numbers of young Catholics who gathered in Paris to celebrate their religion. It was a surprising moment for European Catholicism, which has been in decline for decades — with the churches of Europe becoming little more than tourist attractions. And despite the seeming upsurge in religious feeling in capitals like Paris, priests in Rome tell me that the Vatican loathes the spread of Western hedonism. Rome expects the West to be saved by the East.

Meanwhile, a number of American priests and nuns I know voice an impatience with authoritarian Rome, the pope’s lack of collegiality. The American Catholic Church shudders from a growing split between traditionalists, attentive to Rome, and more individualist Catholics, who tend to shrug off the Vatican’s teachings on matters like birth control and the status of women.

So it will be interesting to watch them. The pope and the communist. Two men so different, but each surely recognizable to the other.

An authoritarian, like John Paul, gray-bearded Fidel is a figure of respect, even affection, through much of Latin America. He is admired less for his deflated Marxist ideology than for his ability, all these years, to have stood up to the gringo bully.

The pope, frail now with age and trembling, remains a giant in the world. In Cuba, we Americans will see him as the winning opponent of the godless Soviet empire. But we would do well to remember, as he stands just 90 miles away, that this pope is a critic also of us.

Continue Reading Close

Richard Rodriguez is the author of "Brown: The Last Discovery of America."

spies like us

How many New Leftists cozied
up to "Amerika's" enemies?

  • more
    • All Share Services

two weeks ago, three leftist radicals from the University of Wisconsin were arrested and charged with spying. The media played the story big. But I still have one question: Why only three?

James Clark, Kurt Stand and Theresa Squillacote were all New Left enthusiasts, Maoists who had gotten that revolutionary religion in the late ’60s. Beginning in 1972, they decided to strike a blow at “Amerika” by delivering state secrets to the communist East German dictatorship. Squillacote (code-name “Tina”) had become a Pentagon analyst; her husband, Kurt (“Ken”), a labor union representative; Clark was a private detective who had once worked at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Boulder, Colo. In addition to funneling State Department papers to their East German spymasters, Squillacote, in 1995, offered their services to a South African communist and government official, in a letter bemoaning the “horrors” of “bourgeois parliamentary democracy” — such as the one, presumably, presided over by Nelson Mandela.

In fact, lots of New Leftists collaborated with America’s enemies during the ’60s and ’70s. Why should they have been any different from the Old Leftists who spied for Stalinist Russia in the 1930s and 1940s — like Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and Ethel and Julius Rosenberg?

As I described in my book “Radical Son,” I had my own encounters with a KGB agent in London in the mid-’60s, when I shared the New Left faith. I was wined and dined at London’s fanciest restaurants, my gracious host plying me with questions about my employer, the philosopher Bertrand Russell. Russell was a leader of Britain’s “peace movement” but something of a thorn in the Soviets’ side, having demanded, in one of his more noteworthy news conferences, that Moscow send MiG fighters to North Vietnam to shoot down American planes. An odd position for a self-described pacifist, but in those days Russell was being guided by an American radical named Ralph Schoenman, who was not about to let such small inconsistencies stand in the way of his revolutionary agenda.

In addition to working for Russell, I was an instructor for the University of Maryland, which held courses on U.S. military bases scattered about England. After a number of Coquilles Saint-Jacques, my dinner companion got around to asking me directly if I would supply information to him about what I saw on the bases. I told him to get lost. But he continued to hang around the New Left in London and treat other people I knew to similarly handsome lunches and dinners. How many of them received his gentle entreaties to spy for mother Russia? How many of them said yes?

Quite a few, I suspect. In fact, the number of New Leftists who actively worked with communist regimes and their intelligence agencies probably runs into the thousands. The Venceremos Brigades, composed of New Leftists who went to Cuba ostensibly to harvest sugar cane, were operated by the DGI, the acronym for Cuban intelligence. How many of them came home with more than a piece of cane as a souvenir? The CISPES committees (Committee in Solidarity With the People of El Salvador), which were very active during the Reagan years, were affiliated with the communist guerrilla movement in El Salvador. New Left radicals, like Tom Hayden, met in Eastern Europe and Cuba with communist officials from Hanoi and South Vietnam’s National Liberation Front to plot the fall of the “Amerikan” empire.

This shouldn’t surprise anyone. If one believes, as all “progressives” did (and many still do) that America is the evil empire, then why not cooperate with its socialist enemies and governments of America’s Third World “victims”? The Wisconsin three did it; why not others?

Everybody in leadership positions in the New Left were aware of contacts like the ones I’ve mentioned, but only a handful have ever written about them. Does this mean that the contacts they made with hostile powers led to more than a pleasurable free meal? Not necessarily. On the other hand, if those contacts were on the up-and-up, why the continued reticence? At the very least, the stories would be colorful, and would also contribute to a greater understanding of those tumultuous times.

Come to think of it, what was Bill Clinton doing in Russia during that winter of 1969 but doesn’t want to talk about?

Continue Reading Close

David Horowitz is a conservative writer and activist.

Che and Diana: The Shocking Untold Story

In a book proposal for his autobiography, Cuba's maximum leader Fidel Castro outs his brother, calls Robert Kennedy a "complete fool" and compares Che Guevara to Princess Diana.

  • more
    • All Share Services

| The cult of personality demands that the leader’s life remain a state secret. No wife or lover can be seen at the leader’s side, for, like Christ, he is married to the people. What, then, are we to make of the news that Fidel Castro, el lider maximo, plans to publish a tell-all autobiography in which he compares Che Guevara to Princess Diana, outs his brother (armed forces chief Raul Castro) and reveals that he’d like nothing better than to give up his responsibilities and relax at the beach with a good cigar?

A proposal for “History Will Absolve Me: The Autobiography of Fidel Castro” is circulating this week at the Frankfurt Book Fair. In the hands of literary agent Sandy Dijkstra, who has also represented such bestselling authors as Amy Tan and Susan Faludi, it can be expected to fetch a seven-figure advance.

His proposed book offers what looks like a kinder, gentler, more embarrassingly banal Castro. Some excerpts:

On Raul’s sexuality: “He is my brother and I love him. Does he have, shall we say, certain weaknesses and perversions? Yes. Don’t we all? But is this a character flaw? No, not at all.”

On the pope’s visit to Cuba in January: “I longingly remember my mother and her deep faith in God. Now I find myself at the point where, out of respect for her, I can see the same need for guidance and devotion in others … Faith in God is good, because faith is good.”

On Che: “If there is anyone alive who reminds me of Che today — of his complex nature, combining the beautiful and the ideal and the tragic — I would say it is Diana, the Princess of Wales. If you see the vitality of her spirit and the struggle in her life, then you have seen what Che was like!”

On revolutionary mass murder: “In our youthful exuberance and sense of self-righteousness, of knowing that our end was a noble one — we were unjust, we took measures not because they helped the cause of the Revolution, but because they satisfied a human impulse to punish.”

On Robert McNamara and the Cuban Missile Crisis: “McNamara was an idiot — still is! And Robert Kennedy was a complete fool!”

On cigars: Cuba’s intelligence services had photographs of American presidents blown up, Fidel says, “to see if we could determine which cigars they smoked.” And guess what: “Trade embargo or no, Cuba was then and has always remained, in the Oval Office! I can boast that there are no American goods in my office, but American presidents have secretly harbored Cuban cigars all these years.”

Castro gave up smoking cigars in 1980 to serve as an example of good health to his 11.2 million children. This, he has us understand, is symbolic of his greater sacrifice. “That I can no longer smoke cigars is a metaphor for my life. I wish I were free to do what I wanted to … I have enormous responsibilities. I am not the owner of my life since the revolution! … In my own mind, however, it would be liberating to be free to do what I wanted to do, to sit on a terrace overlooking the sea, enjoying a drink of aged rum, and smoking a Cohiba.”

Many Cubans are probably wishing he would do just that. Students of ancient history will recall that “History Will Absolve Me” was the speech Castro gave in his own defense after the failed Moncada barracks attack in 1953. But as exiled novelist Guillermo Cabrera Infante put it recently, “History hasn’t absolved him. History has left him behind. In fact he’s in danger of becoming prehistoric.”

Castro may be politically prehistoric, but he understands the importance of shaping one’s own image in the celebrity culture. Rather than Kitty Kelley, Castro chose Louis Nevaer, an economist and Pacific News Service contributor, to tell his story. Nevaer, whose previous books include “New Business Opportunities in Latin America” and “The Management of Corporate Business Units,” is connected to Castro through a family pharmaceutical business in Mexico, which does business with Cuba.

Foreign investment is increasingly important to the survival of Cuba, but foreigners like everyone else have to deal with the same tired old political institutions. Last week, the Communist Party held its first congress in six years. Castro — who was rumored to be quite sick or even dead — managed to give a seven-hour speech, just like the old days. Even Fidel’s old comrade, Che Guevara, turned up in time to be reburied (Che’s remains recently were dug up in Bolivia, where he died in 1967 at the head of a guerrilla band).

It will certainly be handy for Fidel to have Che around again. Though dead these 30 years, he’s still a useful example of revolutionary sacrifice, and sacrifice has always been an easy word on Castro’s lips. Although most Cubans are clamoring for more economic liberalization, Castro promised them more blood, sweat and tears in the name of maintaining socialism.

As long as they don’t have to read his book.

Continue Reading Close

Arthur Allen writes on health, science and other issues for Salon. He lives in Washington.

Page 18 of 19 in Cuba